Spatial Predisposition of Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus Segments: A Pooled Analysis of the SURF and AIM Dysplasia Trials. (October 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cotton, Cary C; Duits, Lucas C; Wolf, Asher W; Peery, Anne F; Dellon, Evan S; Bergman, Jacques J; Shaheen, Nicholas J
• Is Part Of: American journal of gastroenterology. Volume 110:Number 10(2015)
• Publication Date: 2015-10
• Subjects: Stomach -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Intestines -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal Diseases -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.33
• DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2015.263
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0002-9270

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Surveillance endoscopy detects dysplasia within Barrett's esophagus (BE) and dictates treatment. Current biopsy regimens recommend uniformly spaced random biopsies. We assessed the distribution of dysplasia in BE to develop evidence‐based biopsy regimens. Methods: We performed analysis of the distribution of dysplasia within BE using pretreatment biopsy data from two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of radiofrequency ablation for dysplastic BE: the SURF (Surveillance vs. Radiofrequency Ablation) trial and the AIM Dysplasia (Ablation of Intestinal Metaplasia (AIM) Containing Dysplasia) trial. We used generalized linear models with generalized estimating equations (GEE) to estimate prevalence differences for dysplasia depending on the standardized location of biopsies. We performed Monte Carlo simulation of biopsy regimens to estimate their yield for any dysplasia within segments. Results: Dysplasia preferentially resides in the proximal‐most half of the BE segment that is almost twice as likely to demonstrate dysplasia as the distal‐most quartile. In pooled analysis, compared with the distal‐most quarter, the prevalence difference in the proximal‐most quarter was 22.6%, in the second proximal‐most quarter 23.1%, and in the second distal‐most quarter 15.3%. The best performing biopsy regimen in simulation studies acquired 8 biopsies in the most proximal cm of BE, 8 biopsies in the second cm, and 2 biopsies in each cm thereafter (q1cm: 8, 8, 2, 2…). A slightly simpler q2cm (every 2 cm) regimen (q2cm: 12, 12, 4…) was nearly as effective. Conclusions: The post hoc analysis of two RCTs reveals a substantially increased prevalence of dysplasia proximally in BE segments. Our simulations suggest an altered biopsy regimen could increase sensitivity of biopsies in short‐segment BE by >30%.